Feds oppose state's effort to empowerlandowners

Wyoming’s new "split-estate" law was meant to
give property owners more control over energy development on land
where the underlying minerals are owned by someone else, usually
the federal government. Now, the law has hit a huge obstacle
— the Bush administration.

Years of lobbying by
ranchers and environmentalists persuaded the Legislature to pass
the law in February (HCN, 2/7/05: Split-estate rebellion: Ranchers
take on energy developers). It was intended to help landowners
protect about 12.5 million acres of private land on which the
federal Bureau of Land Management controls the vast majority of oil
and gas leasing.

The state split-estate law holds energy
companies to much tougher standards than does the BLM. It requires
companies to pay landowners for any loss of income or "loss of land
value" caused by drilling, for instance. That broad definition
covers impacts to all aspects of ranching and farming, as well as
to dude ranches, bed-and-breakfasts, and hunting and fishing
operations, says Laurie Goodman, president of the Landowners
Association of Wyoming, which pushed for the law.

The
BLM, by comparison, requires companies to pay landowners only for
damages to crops or to land improvements, such as stock ponds. In a
June 13 letter to Wyoming officials, Kathleen Clarke, head of the
BLM, said the state law imposes "inappropriate ... economic
burdens" and potential delays on companies. So, she concluded, the
state law should not apply to private lands where the BLM handles
oil and gas leasing.

But Wyoming Attorney General Pat
Crank vows to enforce the state law on those private lands, even if
it means court battles. Crank says Wyoming "doesn’t need
Clarke to tell us what is and isn’t reasonable."